Are there any Moderators watching this at all? Why wasn't this thread kicked into touch and others reminded of the original post whilst offering those who want to talk about Magick (on a Buddhist forum) the opportunity to open another thread.

If we can talk about Crowley can I open a thread about the New Kadampa Tradition....no double standards in here......are there?

As it stands the initial post about practice has been sucessfully hijacked an is now an argument about Magick!

OP:
My question is this, why 'don't' you practice other methods that you may have experience of....whats your rationale?

tantric methods don't count as "other methods" but gelug-style rationalization does? i guess you don't know what went on behind closed curtains in tibet for thousands of years.

Just keep breathing in and out like this. Don't be interested in anything else. It doesn't matter even if someone is standing on their head with their ass in the air. Don't pay it any attention. Just stay with the in-breath and the out-breath. Concentrate your awareness on the breath. Just keep doing it. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Just_Do_It_1_2.php

Are there any Moderators watching this at all? Why wasn't this thread kicked into touch and others reminded of the original post whilst offering those who want to talk about Magick (on a Buddhist forum) the opportunity to open another thread.

If we can talk about Crowley can I open a thread about the New Kadampa Tradition....no double standards in here......are there?

As it stands the initial post about practice has been sucessfully hijacked an is now an argument about Magick!

Oh well...

Yes, I have no idea what the relevance of most of the posts on this thread have to Theravada meditation, which is why I moved it to Open Dhamma.

Since the OP did invite comment about non-Theravada techniques, it's hard to draw the line here...

danieLion wrote:you single this itsy-bitsy corner out and act as if it's a representative sample of what Magick in its entirety is.

convivium wrote:fine, but it's the culmination or "highest degree" of crowley's system....

Wrong again. There are three degrees above the "sex magic" grades: Magister Templi, Impissimus and Magus.

danieLion wrote:And as for to its relationship to Buddhism, unless you're a monk, none of these things are forbidden.

convivium wrote:i'm not sure how e.g. that eroto comotose thing could be in line with the 3rd precept. that would definitely complicate my practice. here! drink this for sense restraint, renunciation, and patient endurance....

I understand how this might be difficult if you're used to assuming that the way you view the world is the way everyone else should view the world. If you or other lay practitioners feel "sex magic" violates the 3rd precept then it does. But that doesn't make it universally applicable to all lay practitioners. Sexual misconduct is a very ambiguous term open to a variety of interpretations (except for the ordained), and if you knew anything about Magick you'd know that it involves extreme sense restraint, dedicated renunciation and tremendous amounts of patient endurance (Cf. Perdurabo).

Beautiful Breath wrote:...yeah I invited experiences from other 'Buddhist' traditions - that's quite clear from my initial question. It wasn't meant to include ALL other religions....good grief...!!!

That's your fault for not specifying it in your OP, and it was not at all clear from initial question. We're not mind readers! And you did not indicate in any way that it was to be restricted to Buddhist traditions--and you're still being ambigous by putting apostrophe quotes around the term 'Buddhist."

Beautiful Breath wrote:...yeah I invited experiences from other 'Buddhist' traditions - that's quite clear from my initial question. It wasn't meant to include ALL other religions....good grief...!!!

That's your fault for not specifying it in your OP, and it was not at all clear from initial question. We're not mind readers! And you did not indicate in any way that it was to be restricted to Buddhist traditions--and you're still being ambigous by putting apostrophe quotes around the term 'Buddhist."

Are there any Moderators watching this at all? Why wasn't this thread kicked into touch and others reminded of the original post whilst offering those who want to talk about Magick (on a Buddhist forum) the opportunity to open another thread.

If we can talk about Crowley can I open a thread about the New Kadampa Tradition....no double standards in here......are there?

As it stands the initial post about practice has been sucessfully hijacked an is now an argument about Magick!

Oh well...

Yes, I have no idea what the relevance of most of the posts on this thread have to Theravada meditation, which is why I moved it to Open Dhamma.

Since the OP did invite comment about non-Theravada techniques, it's hard to draw the line here...

Mike

I have no interest in the Kadampa cult or the Yellow Hat cult. I prefer Theravada, as did Crowley, who was trained by the Theravadin master, Bhikkhu Ananda Metteyya (a.k.a. Charles Henry Allan Bennett, a.k.a. Allan Bennett, a.ka. Frater Petros Xristos Magister [8=3]).

Mike, at least you admit you have a knwoledge deficit. To fix it, start here:

Back in England in 1908, Bennett attempted to spread the study of Buddhism on his native soil. He published "The Training of the Mind" in The Equinox. Crowley tried to rekindle their friendship, but to no avail. By this time Crowley had rejected Buddhism in favor of his own reworking of the Hermetic Tradition, which he called Thelema; Bennett would have nothing to do with it. He remarked, "No Buddhist would consider it worthwhile to pass from the crystalline clearness of his own religion to this involved obscurity" (Sutin 193). It is hard to say what really caused the break between them. Perhaps their visions of the divine really had grown too far apart. It would not be the only dear friend that Crowley would lose. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_He ... an_Bennett

Which is also to say, while I'm not a Crowley apologist--and be true to the OP--it is absurd to say that Thelemic Magick and Buddhism are mutualy exclusive.

it is absurd to say that Thelemic Magick and Buddhism are mutualy exclusive.

thelema magick of the sexual sort that i pointed out and sexual tantric practices found in vajrayana buddhism (the red hat drugkpas might be an unfortunate exception) are mutually exclusive in their relation to the orgasm (see the dalai lama quote above). that's a very important point as far as kundalini based yoga systems go (see the source passages in the link i provided for clarification). non-kundalini systems (e.g. vipassana, samatha etc) are not related to kundalini, and so have no place in the issue i am raising.

Just keep breathing in and out like this. Don't be interested in anything else. It doesn't matter even if someone is standing on their head with their ass in the air. Don't pay it any attention. Just stay with the in-breath and the out-breath. Concentrate your awareness on the breath. Just keep doing it. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Just_Do_It_1_2.php

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," enter on and abide in them.'

"Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.'

"As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"

"If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they would not eat without having given, nor would the stain of miserliness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite, their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared."
Iti 26

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," enter on and abide in them.'

"Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.'

"As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"

Just keep breathing in and out like this. Don't be interested in anything else. It doesn't matter even if someone is standing on their head with their ass in the air. Don't pay it any attention. Just stay with the in-breath and the out-breath. Concentrate your awareness on the breath. Just keep doing it. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Just_Do_It_1_2.php

danieLion wrote:
Which is also to say, while I'm not a Crowley apologist--and be true to the OP--it is absurd to say that Thelemic Magick and Buddhism are mutualy exclusive.

Thanks for the background, it's interesting to see how various people fitted together.

There are many things that are not mutually exclusive to Theravada and obviously many people or ideas that have some connection. Such connections don't necessarily mean that they have much relevance to the Theravada areas of this Forum, which is why this thread is now in Open Dhamma (which is probably where such a topic should have been started in the first place).

I'm not using the kalama sutta in the way that Ven. Thanissaro is rightly arguing against. I didn't even offer my own comments. Just thought that it might help the OP in understanding the reasons why we might choose one practice over another. Which was her original question.

"If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they would not eat without having given, nor would the stain of miserliness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite, their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared."
Iti 26

daverupa wrote:It would be impossible for me, now, to draw down the moon or do a Tarot spread or create a circle or any of that silliness because none of it is based on right view and all of it aggrandizes the self in one way or another, as I see it all now in retrospect.

Even when events occurred which seemed momentous, it's all with contact as condition...

it is absurd to say that Thelemic Magick and Buddhism are mutualy exclusive.

thelema magick of the sexual sort that i pointed out and sexual tantric practices found in vajrayana buddhism (the red hat drugkpas might be an unfortunate exception) are mutually exclusive in their relation to the orgasm (see the dalai lama quote above). that's a very important point as far as kundalini based yoga systems go (see the source passages in the link i provided for clarification). non-kundalini systems (e.g. vipassana, samatha etc) are not related to kundalini, and so have no place in the issue i am raising.